Digital recording of satellite radio is OK with the RIAA

January 5, 2005

RTV71 used our news submit to tell us "So more money makes it acceptable. Like that was unexpected."

What a find there on this story RTV71! This article over at Wired really muddies up the water. The RIAA does not want to have digital broadcasts recorded over terrestrial radio. They claim that this is "The Perfect Storm" that would allow end users to copy at will and piracy would run rampant. (What's it doing now?) Anyway, when asked to clarify the statement, they said it didn't apply to satellite transmissions! This is absolutely illogical and opens the door to the real motivation behind the RIAA legal jihad against it's customer base. The almighty dollar, not solely protection of the author or copyright holder.

Last June, the Recording Industry Association of America sent a letter to the Federal Communications Commission describing the ability to record songs from digital broadcasts as the "perfect storm" facing the music industry.

But within weeks, electronics manufacturer Delphi and Time Trax Technologies released the first products for recording digital tracks from satellite radio, without a note of discord from the RIAA.

<break>

According to Sean Butson, media analyst with financial services company Legg Mason, the RIAA has financial motivations for selectively targeting traditional radio. "When songs get played on satellite radio, recording artists get paid more money than when they get played on terrestrial radio," Butson said. He said satellite radio stations pay 7 percent of revenues to recording artists and copyright holders, whereas radio broadcasters pay less than 1 percent.

You'll have to read the entire 2 page article over at Wired to get the details, it's worth it though, to see what all is going on behind the scenes. There is alot to this story. But, we can plainly see that the jist of it is terrestrial broadcasts have a different economic model with much lower return for the artist (labels) than satellite. Satellite is a money maker big enough to have the RIAA turn their heads.

I have to say at this point it seems that dropping all this legal posturing would be prudent. It's obvious now that no one cares about copying if the cash flow is big enough. There are other ways to generate revenue and let digital freedom advance, let's set this DRM aside now too while were at it.

Source: Wired